Snelling & Snelling v. Dan-Ridge Chevrolet, Inc.
This text of 427 A.2d 846 (Snelling & Snelling v. Dan-Ridge Chevrolet, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The denial, as here, of a motion to open a default judgment does not constitute an abuse of discretion where it clearly appears that the defaulting party has no defense or that he has not been prevented from appearing by mistake, accident or other reasonable cause. General Statutes § 52-212; Practice Book, 1978, § 377; A.D.C. Contracting & Supply Corporation v. Thomas J. Riordan, Inc., 176 Conn. 579, 580-81, 409 A.2d 1027 (1979); Manchester State Bank v. Reale, 172 Conn. 520, 523, 375 A.2d 1009 (1977); see Mechanics Savings Bank v. Tucker, 178 Conn. 640, 643, 425 A.2d 124 (1979).
There is no error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
427 A.2d 846, 179 Conn. 671, 1980 Conn. LEXIS 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snelling-snelling-v-dan-ridge-chevrolet-inc-conn-1980.